Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
VLC Patent Issues?
- Thread starter 7on
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
scotty321 said:
I did read it, and I have to side with software patent holders. Videolan could just as easily license the technology, but that would cost $$$ and software should be free because it costs nothing to write
How the hell are you going to write anything unique if eveyone and their brother could steal the idea and market as their own without consequence? 
I use that program several times every week!
I first thought they were in some other kind of trouble and needed money to hire some lawyers or something. I was ready to come up with serious money to support them.
And they say software patents won't hold back innovation!?!
I first thought they were in some other kind of trouble and needed money to hire some lawyers or something. I was ready to come up with serious money to support them.
And they say software patents won't hold back innovation!?!
Software patents suck
You obviously don't know the posters here. Many of them are Apple fanatics. They don't care that a great piece of open source software is violating some bogus patents. Hell, some of those patents are probably owned by Apple. No, Apple and Microsoft will do whatever it takes to control their markets. They will use patents not to protect their intellectual property, but to prevent others from competing. Those of you who side for software patents need to see the patents that have been awarded. They are vague at best. Something like draw a window thats semi-transparent and displays a text field in it. Yes, most could be thrown out if challenged. But do you have the money to challenge Microsoft or Apple over a patent? Especially when their lawyers will resort to delaying the trial as long as possible. Thats why patents are no longer what they were originally intended to do. They were originally designed to protect an inventor against a corporation. Now, corporations use them to prevent competition.
If software patents had existed in the early 80's we would be nowhere near where we are today in software technology. Microsoft would still be running DOS and Apple would still be producing the same OS it produced in 1984.
Why can't they be like IBM and Sun and make their patents available royalty-free to open source projects? I know there's no chance in hell that Microsoft will ever do it, but Apple depends on open source. Its time to give something back big time.
scotty321 said:
You obviously don't know the posters here. Many of them are Apple fanatics. They don't care that a great piece of open source software is violating some bogus patents. Hell, some of those patents are probably owned by Apple. No, Apple and Microsoft will do whatever it takes to control their markets. They will use patents not to protect their intellectual property, but to prevent others from competing. Those of you who side for software patents need to see the patents that have been awarded. They are vague at best. Something like draw a window thats semi-transparent and displays a text field in it. Yes, most could be thrown out if challenged. But do you have the money to challenge Microsoft or Apple over a patent? Especially when their lawyers will resort to delaying the trial as long as possible. Thats why patents are no longer what they were originally intended to do. They were originally designed to protect an inventor against a corporation. Now, corporations use them to prevent competition.
If software patents had existed in the early 80's we would be nowhere near where we are today in software technology. Microsoft would still be running DOS and Apple would still be producing the same OS it produced in 1984.
Why can't they be like IBM and Sun and make their patents available royalty-free to open source projects? I know there's no chance in hell that Microsoft will ever do it, but Apple depends on open source. Its time to give something back big time.
No software patents? Are you kidding?
I read the vlc statement, and it pointed to the url above that Poff pointed out. I love VLC, but they are stupid for attacking software patents in general. Where would any programmer be without software patents? Sure there is "donationware", but good luck trying to find enough good-hearted souls to live off of.
Fact is, Apple wouldn't exist without software patents, and neither would many other pioneers in the technology industry. Maybe there needs to be stricter rules on WHAT you can patent so that legit projects like VLC don't get tread down, but patents in general are a good thing. It rewards honest people trying to make a living.
Poff said:
I read the vlc statement, and it pointed to the url above that Poff pointed out. I love VLC, but they are stupid for attacking software patents in general. Where would any programmer be without software patents? Sure there is "donationware", but good luck trying to find enough good-hearted souls to live off of.
Fact is, Apple wouldn't exist without software patents, and neither would many other pioneers in the technology industry. Maybe there needs to be stricter rules on WHAT you can patent so that legit projects like VLC don't get tread down, but patents in general are a good thing. It rewards honest people trying to make a living.
Who is suing anyway? Does anyone know?
Oh, and you guys better get the latest copy of mplayer also, since this is going to go too. Apple better release a really good QT or a lot of people will think twice about switching when you actually have no real player to play the most common formats...
Oh, and you guys better get the latest copy of mplayer also, since this is going to go too. Apple better release a really good QT or a lot of people will think twice about switching when you actually have no real player to play the most common formats...
Software patents are a new thing. Programmers were doing just fine before them.longofest said:
Actually, the opposite is true. No big tech company today got where they are from software patents, and many of them would never have gotten started if one of the ideas they had was patented.longofest said:
Suppose patents had been around in the 80s, and someone decided to patent "clicking a mouse button to activate a program," then demanded obscene amounts of money to license this "idea." This would have completely killed all the innovation you saw in the 80's and 90's. They *will* kill innovation now that they are coming into existance. And yes, the types of "ideas" being patented ARE this obvious.
Software patents strictly favor big, wealthy companies who file trivial patents and cross-license them with other big comapnies. It ensures the big boys get to stay around and profit forever without having to worry about a new company that competes with the ideas behind their technologies.longofest said:
Exactly
Where would OS X be without FreeBSD, gcc, apache, openssh, samba, and all that other stuff in /usr/lib
jocknerd said:
Where would OS X be without FreeBSD, gcc, apache, openssh, samba, and all that other stuff in /usr/lib
Cant live without VLC
Most of the porno I d/l wont run in Quicktime, and I hate loading up Microsoft's video player... hell cant even think of the name of it right now.
Most of the porno I d/l wont run in Quicktime, and I hate loading up Microsoft's video player... hell cant even think of the name of it right now.
therevolution said:
Ehh sorry, patents have been around for more than a century. And in my opinion the mouse was a REAL invention, and should have been granted a patent, or else patents should be abolished altogether. The truth is that you won't earn much money if you demand obscene amounts for licenses, cause nobody will buy it. You'll be better of if you ask a decent fee, and that is how it works in the real world.
jared_kipe said:
I had lots of trouble with this too. When i finally read the readme file I found this:
VLC is known to have lots of problems on G5's. Try going into the preferences -> Modules -> audio output -> coreaudio. Now change the device value from 0 to 1. Choose Save and Quit and restart VLC.
Now DVD audio works fine on my computer. Hope this helps.
They did years and years ago, maybe youve heard of it... Windows. If you want a basic explanation get yourself Pirates of The Silicon Valley.
kingjr3 said:I did read it, and I have to side with software patent holders. Videolan could just as easily license the technology, but that would cost $$$ and software should be free because it costs nothing to write
Well, it seems the people behind VLC is. Obviously they have made a relatively unique product, which perform certain completely basic functions that isn't performed as well by any commercial players.
The problem with software patents (as the Eu wants to implement it) is that is not the actual coding/programming which is protected but the odea behind. An example of an idea that can/will be patented is streaming video over the internet. You don't need to be a programmer to get such an idea, you just have to be smart AND have the ressources=money to get the patent. Then you can charge money from all the little programmers who are actually capable implementing the idea.
The result is that freelance programming will be near to impossible because they will keep running into patents (which possibly haven't even been realised yet) without knowing it - only finding out once they get sued by the patent holder and all your work will be wasted.
Thus you can only make a living programming if you work for a company big enough to also employ lawyers.
The only reason this law is going to pass is the fact that a number of big companies has a lot of expensive lobbyists working for them in Bruxelles.
A
Apparently this ruling is to bring EU patent law into line with US Law on the matter where software patents already exist. Quite why we have to follow the US example and not the other way around is a different question...tpjunkie said:Uh, maybe you might want to specify CODE here instead of "components"
On a more serious note, this EU patent bull needs to be stopped.
point665 said:
Heh. Thank you! Exactly my point. Windows. And we don't like it they stole our CODE (thanks someone) and people thinking windows had it first - when it's simply not true!
If VLC are allowed to steel code then they'll also get credit for it.
SpaceMagic said:
Patents have nothing to do with stealing code, they are about stealing so-called ideas, such as using a shopping basket in an online shop, optimising a compiler or reacting on a double-clicked mouse button. Usually, software patents are owned by large corporations who were not even the first to apply the 'method' in their patent.
There is currently heavy pressure by large American companies to enact software patent legislation in the European Union. VLC is participating in one of the public campains against this nonsense. VLC and a vast majority of open-source projects would become illegal if such laws are enacted, since more or less every software programme violates at least several of these bullcrap patents and they have no real means to defend themselves against lawsuits by large companies.
Software patents are one of the most stupid ideas that I've ever heard of. If they had existed 30 years ago then every single OS or application developer today would be in patent hell. Everything from memory protection and multitasking to interrupt handling to things as simple as clicking a button --Amazon one click ordering-- would be patented. I for one, as a professional software engineer, can do without that crap.